As result of budget gimmicks, the use of one-time revenue and his failure to require the wealthy to pay their fair share in income taxes, the candidate for governor that is elected next month will have to manage a $4.8 billion dollar deficit over the next three fiscal years, including at least a $1.4 billion shortfall in next year’s state budget.

But rather than tell voters the truth about Connecticut’s fiscal situation at last night’s WFSB candidate debate, both Malloy and Foley reiterated their promise not to raise taxes over the next four years. Their pledges come despite the fact that both of these politicians know that there is absolutely no way to balance the state budget without additional revenue.

Both Malloy and Foley say that, if elected, they will not raise taxes, not cut vital services, not reduce the state workforce and will not need to negotiate contract changes with state employees.

The notion that such campaign promises could be met is not only laughable but it is a sad commentary on how far from the truth Connecticut’s gubernatorial candidates will stray in their ongoing efforts to get elected.

Malloy and Foley’s claim that they will “flat fund” the state budget purposely overlooks the fact that the state budget will grow by at least half a billion dollars next year including an additional $330 million for debt service as a result of Malloy’s excessive state borrowing and $170 million in increased payments to the pension and healthcare funds.

If Malloy and Foley were being honest with voters they’d be saying that if they win, they will need to raise taxes, cut services, transfer costs to the cities and towns and negotiate contract changes with state employees.

However, as appalling as the candidate’s performances were in last night’s debate, the award for “anti-democracy” goes to WFSB for excluding or agreeing to exclude Joe Visconti, the petitioning candidate for governor, from the event.

According to the CT Newsjunkie article, “WFSB officials didn’t include him because he didn’t receive 10 percent support in the last public poll.”

A candidate needs to get 10% in the polls to attend a debate?

Wait, What?

WFSB, in conjunction with the two major party candidates, banned Visconti from the stage despite the fact that he collected the requisite 7,500 signatures and will be listed as a gubernatorial candidate on this year’s ballot. Although it should irrelevant at this point, Visconti also received 7 percent of the projected vote in the last public opinion poll. That translates to over 70,000 Connecticut voters saying they will vote for the 3rd party candidate.

The decision by WFSB and the Democratic and Republican candidates to hold a debate without Visconti is nothing short of an insult to every voter in Connecticut. Connecticut has been traditionally known as the Constitution State but to refuse to allow a certified 3rd party candidate to participate in the televised debate violates the most basic tenets of our democracy.

Rather than exclude 3rd party candidates, WFSB and other broadcasters have an obligation to open up access for their viewers. As WFSB knows,

“Broadcasters have an obligation to serve the public’s interests, not just their own commercial interests. The government provides broadcasters free and exclusive access to a portion of the public airwaves – “spectrum” – for broadcasting. These profitable licenses come in exchange for broadcasters’ commitment to serve the “public interest, convenience, or necessity.”

Preventing a certified candidate for governor from participating in the televised debate should be viewed as a violation of WFSB’s broadcasting license.

Agreed. Excluding Visconti from the debate was disgusting. Adding a third person to the mix enlarges and deepens the debate. Besides–Visconti earned his right to be on the ballot, he earned his right to be a part of the debate.

msavage

Oh, and as for the other stuff. The lies work. People will believe them and vote for them without ever thinking about where the billions of dollars will come from. People are stupid.

msavage

Ugh–the above blanket statement is unfair (an immature on my part). Let me qualify. There are some people who are stupid enough to vote along party lines without even giving the issues much consideration. There are others who will listen, and accept lies without really thinking about the reality of the situation. Fortunately, there are many people who are capable of thinking for themselves who will realize that what the two candidates propose is an impossibility. I don’t know what to think of the people who aren’t even paying attention at all. How do you look around at what’s going on in this world and not get curious about what’s going wrong and why?

Jim Spellman

Totally agree that Mr. Visconti should have been in the Debate.
Concerned that Educators will throw away their ballot to vote for him – man has no shot of winning .
Governance is the art of compromise . Far better to obtain a measure of one’s beliefs than none at all . Malloy has been a total disaster for Public School Education and Teachers . Foley offers a modicum of accommodation and hope .
This is not a “Win ” election for Public Education and Educators , it is a Damage Control election . Vote Foley or be decimated .

Dodd Flea

Those who insist Visconti has no chance of winning view the process wearing blinders. Visconti is surfing a parabolic wave. His ground game is fabulous. Three weeks ago Joe acquired 7% in the Q-Poll with only 11% name recognition. In September that was historic for an unaffiliated candidate. That indicates one of two things. His ground game is working or likely voters are so pissed that they are willing to vote for an unknown because the two party candidates suck so badly.

We contend that Joe will more than double his poll percentage after just one televised debate. His style and knowledge will shine like an incandescent bulb at 500 watts. At 20% Joe will attract the less likely voters to come out on Nov. 4. We Joe’s volunteers are working to get Joe over 60% name recognition. At that level Joe’s likability and charisma take over. We invite all who thirst for good governance to join the Visconti Campaign. For do you know what? You ain’t seen nothin’ yet!

buygoldandprosper

Danny and the budget is like Danny and Sheff…he changes all sorts of things to to fit his own crazy “vision” for this state.
“Under the new law, Asians, Alaskan Natives, Native Americans, and Pacific Islanders will not be counted as racial minorities, but will count as non-minorities.”

buygoldandprosper

Danny continues to wage war on the indigenous people of Connecticut:

“The administration of Gov. Dannel Malloy has asked the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs to scrap proposed rule changes the state believes could lead to recognition of additional Indian tribes in Connecticut.”
He just won’t accept the process because it will cut into his take from the current failing casino’s.

guest

at least foley offered to sit down with teachers and talk to them include them in the process. malloy lied and said teachers support him and teachers already know how they will be treated by malloy. thought of you all and this blog when malloy exclaimed with a smirk ‘teachers support me’. felt like he was lying to me right through my television set.

R.L.

He was lying to you right through your television set. Malloy is despised throughout my building by a heavy majority.

Tom Burns

Wrong

Mary Gallucci

If (when?) Foley wins, Visconti will be rewarded. He is not so far from the mother ship that he won’t be welcomed back with open arms, open carry, etc. And he’ll be happy there. Foley’s a red meat republican and so is Visconti. We witnessed that in the round of endorsements Foley got from tea-party groups. Visconti understands what his role is.
I recall that Visconti was not upset about missing another debate… but I would certainly value hearing him–he’d add plenty of local color and maybe ride up on his white charger.

27Reasons

He’d bring up topics that Malloy & Foley would both prefer (agree) to avoid. Love Visconti, or hate him; his presence would be valuable.

msavage

Exactly. The reason it would be helpful to include him, and the reason that the others don’t want him there, is that he would bring up uncomfortable topics and generate a more honest, off-the-cuff discussion.

In spite of his new spin as “kinder, gentler”, Danny plays dirty to cover up his horrendous record. He did it in Stamford and he is trying to do it again. It is the Malloy way. Please do not buy into it.

GE2L2R

The latest Quinnipiac poll has Foley leading Malloy 46% to 40%. Independent voters are currently favoring Foley 48-35 percent.
Viewers who were interviewed after watching the debate judged Foley’s performance the better by a 62% to 38% margin! What did I miss?

Jim Spellman

Love Educators – those on the Titanic who argued Global
Warming as the ship went down . Please step out of the comfort zone of intellectual arbiters and recognize it is your ass that is on the line – Dannell has already slapped it , now he wants to kick it in to oblivion .

GE2L2R

The Danbury News-Times ran an editorial this morning (Thursday, 10/2) that addressed the shortcomings of Tuesday’s gubernatorial debate that I thought was surprisingly on target.

Entitled: “Personal Attacks No Substitute for Substance on Issues”, it did ask specific questions of Governor Malloy’s and Tom Foley’s education platforms. The entire editorial is at:

“On education, Foley should explain how his money-follows-the-child proposal is different than voucher systems and not harmful to financially strapped school districts; Malloy should provide specifics on how he would deal with the controversial Common Core implementation once the scheduled delays are over. Both should address how they would tackle the tangled and unfair Cost Education Sharing formula.”